On 24th April the Earl of Northesk asked Her Majesty's Government a question which was due for answer by 8th May and was answered on 20th May:
He asked: "Whether any official or Minister in the Home Office has offered written or oral advice to any executive of the company Phorm as to the legality of their targeted advertising software product; if so, what was the advice; in what circumstances was it given; and what was the justification for giving it." [HL3268]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State in the Home Office (Lord West of Spithead who is responsible for Security and Counter-terrorism) has replied:
"The Home Office was asked by a number of parties, including Phorm's legal representative, for a view on the compatibility of targeted advertising services with the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. It provided a guidance note for those parties.
The note is not, nor was it intended to be taken as, a definitive statement or interpretation of the law, which only a court can give. Nor was it intended for publication. However, a copy of that note has been published at
http://cryptome.org/ho-phorm.pdf.
Working to protect the public, the Home Office is keen to help industry understand its legislative responsibilities, and to work with business in order to achieve a workable balance between commercial interests and public safety. In this way potential legal obligations can be taken into account in the conception of new products and services."
So we're just waiting on that other question:
"Which law enforcement agency, Department or other statutory body has responsibility for investigating and prosecuting possible criminal breaches of (a) the Data Protection Act 1998, (b) the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, and (c) the Computer Misuse Act 1990." [HO HL3267]
Hank